Quentin
QUOTE: Originally posted by FJ and G The Anti Gates A).. Depends on your definition of "public good." Years, decades, actually a century or more (most likely) when the land was used for the railroad, it was deemed in the public's interest. Most of the original landowners have been dead for a long long time. B)...To make use of the RR now for the linear space reasons I listed, would, of course depend on how one values the land for the public's good.
QUOTE: Originally posted by rhburn3 Congestion getting through Chicago seems to be a major problem. Crew costs may make junctioning at places like Streator expensive, but the old NYC line (Now NS) does get to Elkhart with less congestion. The old Milwaukee Road and NYC used to interchange at Ladd, IL. That route could be used a rebuild for the UP to by pass Chicago. Actually, the UP already has a line to Troy Grove, IL which could be extended to Ladd and around to Granville, IL.
QUOTE: Originally posted by wrwatkins For NKPgator. I disagree with you that light rail is like cussing. Having spent 7 years on the board of directors of a large transit agency I have an insight to light rail vs heavy (freight and conventional passenger) rail. The railroads will not give up their ROW just because a transit agency wants to tear it up for light rail. After all the BNSF, UP, and others are in business to move freight and need their tracks to operate. What we bought was under utilized or out of service lines going to the center of a town. The metrics of rail service has changed in the last 100 years. No longer is there a rail line up every alley in metropolitan areas to serve warehouses, factories, etc. These have moved to the suburbs and most of the terminal railways have greatly diminished in size (length, not width). What remains is the lines of several independant rail lines that went to down town areas. These remain from before the merger craze in the last 25 years. Thanks to mergers much of this track is redundant as the merged lines are using the best line to get through the town. At one time there were 7 class 1s in Dallas. Now there are two. (There is a third, KCS, however it terminates here and does not cross the town) We managed to purchase the redundant lines for future conversion to light rail. By definition light rail typically only goes 10-15 miles from the center of town. Anything longer would call for commuter (heavy) rail. A transit agency is wise to buy these redundant lines when they are available. Even if your current plans do not call for light rail on a given corridor buy it anyway. Who knows how the transit patterns will change in 10-20 years. You NEVER will get it any cheaper and after it is built on forget reverting it back to rail service. Disused corridors typically go for 1/2 to 1 million per mile and typically are 100 feet wide. This is the optimum width to run a two track light rail system and still have room for a third line to handle any freight that a shortline may develop. Think of the cost to buy a 100 foor strip through any town. NOBODY's treasury is big enough to do this. So do not curse light rail. It is still 4' 8 1/2" wide and employs pobably more sophisticated signalling than a heavy rail line. Yes, the cars do not look like a Harriman coach but a train ride is a train ride. As to cost to lay a track on an existing ROW figure on 1 million per mile. Forget rehabbing the old line. By this time the ties are rotton and the rail is usually too light to be useful in todays service. Call the junk man and hope he will remove it for tha salvage value. This investment is for a good high speed rail line without any signalling. Figure the same investment per mile for signalling and catenary if you electrify. Our total investment including ROW, trackwork, signalling, catenary, yards and cars averages 45 million per mile. Railroading is not for the faint at heart.
QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates QUOTE: Originally posted by FJ and G The Anti Gates A).. Depends on your definition of "public good." Years, decades, actually a century or more (most likely) when the land was used for the railroad, it was deemed in the public's interest. Most of the original landowners have been dead for a long long time. B)...To make use of the RR now for the linear space reasons I listed, would, of course depend on how one values the land for the public's good. A) well, many farms are family businesses, so you are actually pitting the interests of the Farm business which exists now, versus the interest of some short line that may or may not ever materialize. Seems like a "bird in the hand" type consideration to me. B) "public's good"...ha ha , you are a funny man. If such an operation were to materialize, it would probably be privately held, expect huge taxpayer subsidies and property tax abatement, and benefir only a couple weathy line side business operators (grain elevators etc) with the taxpayer helping to get that rich dude's corn to market cheaply. with some hollow promise that (ahem) "Someday this line might attract industry and create jobs" (/ahem) "Preservation" has become quite the racket for some con artists. Hey, I'm not saying I am "anti biketrails".....nor am I "anti railbank".....both strategies have their place. But I don't think that a farmer reclaiming land that is going to waste automatically makes him the bad guy, either. After all the STB must have not seen any serious "greater common good" issues when deciding to allow the abandonment in the first place, or they would have had to reckon with it then,....right. What I can say is that if I were such a farmer (as mentioned above) and had a buncha big dreaming nostalgists trying to block my real use of said land citing "greater common good" pipe dreams... only 2 words come to mind that describe how I would feel... TARGET PRACTICE... [:D]
QUOTE: Originally posted by tormadel And the Rock Island between St Louis and Kansas city is still there. I read a CRIP historical society article about it last year. I forget who the owner was but he was sued and won against many local and state agencies in MO that had illegally removed bridges and overpasses, paved over crossings. Also against private citizens who had taken it upon themselves to push rails into the ditch in suburban KC where it ran through they're back yards. The line had never been officially abandoned just not in use for years so they had had no right to do these things. And supposedly these state agencies were being required to replace all these structures and crossings at no cost to the railroad. I don't know if it has been finished of if the shortline had run any trains over the whole length yet.
QUOTE: Originally posted by LVJJJ modelcar, since it sounds like you would not be opposed to re-opening the r/w that you ride on, I am not referring to you. It's true that the rails-to-trails movement has preserved many rr-rights-of-way (during my tenure as a planner, helped preserve railtrails here in NW Washington), however many of those who support the trails will allow re-opening the rails only over their dead bodies (I hope they'll make good ballast). I'm not a casual observer of government regulations & environmental extremists, as I worked for Whatcom County Planning for over 20 years as a zoning and subdivision administrator ('73 to '00). I sadly watched as the art of compromise (regarding planning and zoning) disappeared in a cloud of environmental extremism. The hypocracy of the environmental elite who promote the green agenda while tooling around in their SUV's, drives me nuts, cause I was in the middle of the fight for over 2 decades and I hate dishonesty. Now I am a consultant for the overburdened, tax-paying, land owner who finds his property held hostage because the greenies (i.e. anti-capitalists who are heavily invested in the stock market) have been able to win over the legislatures and courts. Hopefully, since we are both on the Trains website, we are still on the same page. Larry in Blaine.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.